click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16
with the gop does at their jobs at my job. i feel sorry for them. what i worry about most is granted paul. i am --rand paul. and i am an old time lutheran. rand paul is not to be trusted. it is important to know exactly the religion of our candidates. there is nothing more important. host: she is gone. guest: rand paul's father is a christian and religious man. the republican party is going through rebuilding and redesign and try to figure out what they will do and rand paul could be a big part of that. he had a filibuster on the floor and i'm sure we will be hearing his name more in the future. host: mechanicsville, va., go ahead. caller: i have a question -- when you are debating about the budget, why do they continue to put amendments in there that have absolutely nothing to do with - the budget? guest: that the great question. it's because they can. there is a role in the senate that says they can attach strings to the budget and no one can stop them. given the opportunity that senators have, they took it. mideast policy got involved and to guns and so they did whatever they wanted to do. t
paul ryan's budget plan comes up this week. hear a veryting to spirited debate both in the senate and house. we will have republicans and differenton very sides of which should be done. >> how does paul ryan's budget compared to the democratic proposal? cut spending a lot more. the's budget would reduce deficit by almost $6 trillion in 10 years. reduce ay budget would little under $2 trillion in 10 years. >> what other groups are offering their own budget plan docks water they likely to focus on? >> -- who will be issuing their own budget plans? budget will be similar to patty murray's budget in the senate. increases,ave tax but neither would balance the budget in 10 years. also the congressional black caucus and the congressional progressive caucus will be introducing budget. it's possible a ryan version could be introduced in the senate. >> what is likely to happen in the senate this week? >> it will be democrats making the case for the patty murray budget. convince someto democratic senators who may not support that budget. they will have to sell it to democratic senators as we
a chance really to see firsthand the rolling out of what we call the ryan budget. paul ryan as the chairman of our budget committee once again leads, i believe, the intellectual and thought process on talking about the future that we should have in this country. certainly the budget is that primer, that guiding post, that opportunity for us to lay out a philosophy about what republicans stand for, and today the american people are having a chance to hear from our colleagues, the democrats. of course as you listen to our colleagues, our friends, the democrats talk, everything about a budget is all about if you're a republican, us harming the middle class, us ruining the country, headed in the wrong direction. that is because they have taken the simple approach to they will try and fund everything. they will try and fund hospitals. they will fund airports. they will fund schools. they will do all these amazing things. and the facts of the case are is that that process and that future does not work. paul ryan yesterday, before the rules committee, very carefully, argued the point that really i
this panel presentation thank you to our two guest speakers, and welland and paul smith, both of mÔme will be introduced to you mr. morrison. thank you very much. alan? >> thanks. welcome to everybody here. i want to introduce our two panelists. you have a program that describes their history in detail. both of them have filed briefs in the cases now pending before the court. to my immediate left is paul smith, a partner at general and block here in washington, d.c. and among his notable achievements, he was the victorious council in moines against texas. jeremiah wright is edward weller and from the public policy center -- edward welle whelan and,edward with the public policy center. reaganin the administration -- >> i was in the bush administration. >> excuse me. not that old. i will talk about is the one that will be argued tomorrow. it is called hollingsworth against perry. it began with the california supreme court ruling that as a matter of california state lot of laws banning same-sex marriages were unconstitutional with the california constitution. immediate become a process w
to talk about the misguided priorities laid out in the republican budget as presented by chairman paul ryan. once again chirme ryan has proposed a budget that guts low-income program. the ryan budget not only does not end hunger now, it actually makes hunger in america worse than it is today. simply put, mr. speaker, we are currently not doing enough to end hunger now. there are over 50 million hungry americans in this country, 17 million are kids. over 47 million rely on snap, formerly known as food stamps, to put today food on their tables. without this program, real hunger, the actual absence of food, would be actually worse. the great recession is the primary reason hunger is so bad today. now, don't get me wrong, hunger has been getting worse since the presidency of ronald reagan. we almost eradicated hunger in america in the late 1970's, but hunger has been getting steadily worse in the decades since. but the great recession, the worst economic period we've faced since the great depression, resulted in millions more people hungry. millions of people who had to turn to snap as the
wilson was in the white house. good morning, paul. caller: respectfully miss the point. i think your answer on fox is disingenuous. their regular reporting is skewed. do you think it helps when this administration invites in reporters from across the country to do interviews? do you look upon that with disdain? guest: i don't disdain it at all. it is helpful to local reporters and their stations. it is not at all helpful to the process of newscasting that we do. it is another way for the white house to get the president out there, to have him seen by a lot of people, particularly in key markets. if you looks at the statements, you -- if you look at the statements, it will be in key districts where they are trying to get the member of congress to say something, to vote a certain way. it is all very carefully planned. i don't think it gives those local reporters a chaps to ask questions that are of interest mainly to their own audience. i don't think the white house should crow about how much media experience or exposure the rpt has give -- given, when it goes not so much to the rest o
of presidential news conferences beginning in formally beginning in 1913. we have paul on the line. good morning. caller: my question is, do you all think it is helpful when this administration and by its local reporters from across the country to do interviews or do you look upon that with the stain?-- disdain? guest: i do not disdain it at all. it is not helpful to the process. it is another way for the white house to get the president out there, have him seen by a lot of people, particularly markets. if you look at and use their traditionally in key congressional districts. they credit the local members of congress to try to change something, to vote a certain way. it is all very carefully egrudge theo not bn local reporters. i do not think the white house should crow about how much media experience the president has given. when it gets not so much to the rest of us. host: from louisville, kentucky, good morning. caller: i am generally curious as to what happens in an off the record conversation. what does that mean his starkly? -- historically? what does it mean now? host: good question. gue
by budget chairman paul ryan. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip each, to five minutes but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, for five minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to call for continued reforms to our health care system. the affordable care act was a huge step in the right direction, but we can do more, because the path we're on is unsustainable. the u.s. spends approximately 18% of its g.d.p. on health, close to twice as much as other developed nations and yet we don't have better health care outcomes. health care costs are rising faster than inflation and wages, meaning they are eating a larger portion of americans' paychecks and the
think we know it is happening. if you look at the youth and our party like marco rubio and paul get and many others, you the idea. we have great hispanic leaders like ted kreuz. i think we have done a real lousy job sometimes of bragging about the success that we have had. when it comes to diversity we have made great strides. i think we'll have a lot of options in 2016. reach out toe to the african-american community, what are your thoughts on insuring every vote counts of? >> we're not going to bore you with the details in the republican national committee. we believe that we need to make it easy to vote in hard to cheat. if that can capture everything that we believe in as a party. it should be hard to cheat. that is something we have endeavored to do. ondo have some restrictions ballot security. questions about cpac where a panel on african-american voters dissolved into a shouting match with at least one activists voters are being systematically disenfranchised. given that backdrop and the party, how do you plan to overcome those challenges? >> for one thing you have to show up
in strong support today of the balanced budget put forward by my friend and chairman paul ryan. and the reasonable and practical approach that this budget committee has taken while they budget hardworking taxpayer dollars. mr. speaker, this budget debate goes deeper than spread sheets and focuses on the longevity of the american dream. today we are considering a republican budget that actually balances in 10 years. calls for pro growth, pro job tax reform -- pro-growth, pro-job tax reform and strengthens medicare for our seniors and future generations. while in the senate harry reid and patty murray are considering a budget that never balances. it increases taxes by $1 trillion and let's medicare and social security race towards bankruptcy. and it turns medicare into a program that rations benefits to seniors. make no mistake, washington is approaching $17 trillion of debt and more than 12 million americans are unable to find work. the decisions we make will either sink us deeper into debt or put us on a path that encourages job creation and restores the belief that if we work
this was the centerpiece of their campaign for the last six months. this was part of what our friend, paul ryan and governor romney, preached from coast to coast, advertised, campaigned, and all of a sudden it was rejected by the american public overwhelmingly. the president was comfortably re-elected and more democratic senators added who support this effort in the house of representatives, not only did we gain seats, but more than a million voters more voted for democrats than republicans. so you would think that this would be put to rest, but it is important for people to know that it is still a viable option as far as our republican friends are concerned. and it's unfortunate, because we are making some progress in reforming the health care system, not by turning our back on medicare, not by transferring the risk and responsibility to seniors and most vulnerable, but by making it more efficient, by taking some of the experiments that we have done in my home state of oregon, and as you well know, there are some health care systems in california that have already found ways to reward value ov
this relate to the loving versus virginia? my question is for paul smith. what is the primary purpose of the petrol government incentivizing marriage in the first place for anyone? if same-sex couples can show they're able to fulfil the purpose, what a special or unique about same-sex relationships that should preclude the federal government from incentivizing any and every other relationship that could fill the purpose such as brothers and sisters that want to live together and file a joint tax return? comparedtators have this to decisions such as plessey and brown and their significant to the african- american community. how do you think the court will weigh the legacy of those cases in their decision? three great questions. the panelists all answer however they want. anti laws or recognized as a to the traditional understanding of marriage. they were phrased that way. were in positions and a restriction on top of what marriages. by contrast this has adhered into what marriage always has been. it involves a radical redefinition to say it is not a male/female union. >> the questions
and they are pleased to affirm, and the point is house budget committee chairman paul ryan released a budget proposal that is most -- is the most reckless austerity plan he's ever proposed. instead of a budget that will slow -- instead we get a budget that will slow the economy and kill jobs. we urge you to vote for the progressive caucus' back-to-work budget which will grow the economy, create seven million jobs and ask the wealthy and multinationals to pay their fair share so we can make investments in our people and our future. 105,000 citizen co-sponsors in less than 48 hours. with that, let me introduce co-chair of the prodepressive caucus mitigating circumstance friend the gentleman from minnesota, keith ellison, for two minutes, thank you. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized -- recognized for two minutes. mr. ellison: thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to just congratulate everybody with the progressive caucus an thank all the staff that did such a good job preparing this excellent budget which gives us an amazing choice as americans, to confront this jobs crisis. i'm so p
will be helpful. if you look at marco rubio, paul ryan, ayotte, some of our under -- some of our governors from a clear generational shift going on in the republican party moving forward, democrats may want to reach back. numbers have been rising dramatically, where he is certainly not upside down. >> have a couple more minister in one last question, and we will try to have swift answers. >> now that the elections are over, we really need government to work for us. as political strategists, is there a chance that compromise can be commendable -- can compromise be commendable and not an election year liability? >> i work for rival the reagan. he compromised on everything. we had a democratic house with a huge majority. he had to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform --here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. for four years we have had a president was not willing to take that kind of leadership to make c
also approved paul ryan's budget proposal which would cut 4.6 trillion dollars over 10 years, repeal the 2010 health care law and replace traditional medicare with a government subsidy to purchase health insurance. the house will return tuesday, april 9. we will have live coverage. meanwhile, a live look in the u.s. senate chamber. the senators will be speaking throughout the day. 50 hours of debate underway in the u.s. senate and you can follow that on c-span two. we expect a round of amendment votes this afternoon. among the amendments they have debated and voted on, the proposal by house republicans, the ryan budget, which failed in the senate as an amendment by a vote of 40-59, and they also passed narrowly an amendment the medicalveal device tax in the 2010 health care law. again, the debate is underway. we caught up with a capitol hill reporter for inside information on the budget proposals in the house and senate. among the amendments they have debated and .ost: let's talk about the cr guest: congress is saying at least for today we avoided a showdown. the senate has passed it
offer this amendment on behalf of senator paul and myself with senator toomey and mcconnell cosponsoring. it's designed to help 11 million low-income children in this country. we appropriate $14.5 billion every year through our title 1 federal funding. it's supposed to go to them but it doesn't get there. that's agreed upon by both the left and the right. for example, marguerite rosa writing for the center for american progress says that the difference between school expenditures is often substantial and she pointed out that the money goes to schools where teachers are paid more but the children aren't necessarily the poor children. and so the poorer children, the ones we intend to help, are left in schools with less money. sometimes the money can add up to quite a bit. the same analysis is then found by the forwardham foundation, i would say that's a center-right organization because of the federal formula we use. so --. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. alexander: let the money follow the child to the school, whether it's public or private and i thank the presi
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16